The treatment of hypertension in care home residents: a systematic review of observational studies

Article English OPEN
Welsh, Tomas ; Gladman, John R.F. ; Gordon, Adam L. (2014)
  • Publisher: Elsevier
  • Journal: Journal of the American Medical Directors Association (issn: 1525-8610, vol: 15, pp: 8-16)
  • Related identifiers: doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2013.06.012
  • Subject: Health Policy | Medicine(all) | Nursing(all)

Aim: To describe the prevalence of hypertension in care home residents, its treatment, change in\ud treatment over time, and the achievement of blood pressure (BP) control.\ud Method: The PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and PsychINFO databases were searched for observational\ud studies involving care home residents with a diagnosis of hypertension. The search was limited to\ud English language articles involving adults and humans published from 1990 onward. Abstracts and titles\ud were reviewed with eligible articles read in full. Bibliographies were examined for further relevant\ud studies. The final selection of studies was then analyzed and appraised.\ud Results: Sixteen articles were identified for analysis, of which half were studies carried out in the United\ud States. The prevalence of hypertension in care home residents was 35% (range 16%e71%); 72% of these\ud were on at least 1 antihypertensive (mean 1.5 antihypertensives per individual), with diuretics being the\ud most common. The prevalence of hypertension in study populations was greater in more recent studies\ud (P ¼ .004). ACEi/ARBs (P ¼ .001) and b-blockers (P ¼ .04) were prescribed more frequently in recent\ud studies, whereas use of calcium-channel blockers and diuretics remained unchanged over time. The\ud number of antihypertensives prescribed per patient was higher (correlation 0.332, P ¼ .009), whereas\ud fewer patients achieved target BP (correlation 0.671, P ¼ .099) in more recent studies.\ud Conclusion: Hypertension is common in care home residents and is commonly treated with antihypertensive\ud drugs, which were prescribed more frequently in more recent studies but with no better BP\ud control. These studies indicate a tendency toward increasing polypharmacy over time, with associated\ud risk of adverse events, without demonstrable benefit in terms of BP control.\ud Copyright 2014 - American Medical Directors
  • References (30)
    30 references, page 1 of 3

    1. Cohen DL, Townsend RR. Update on pathophysiology and treatment of hypertension in the elderly. Curr Hypertens Rep 2011;13:330e337.

    2. Beckett NS, Peters R, Fletcher AE, et al. Treatment of hypertension in patients 80 years of age or older. N Engl J Med 2008;358:1887e1898.

    3. Staessen JA, Fagard R, Thijs L, et al. Randomised double-blind comparison of placebo and active treatment for older patients with isolated systolic hypertension. The Systolic Hypertension in Europe (Syst-Eur) Trial Investigators. Lancet 1997;350:757e764.

    4. Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension. Final results of the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP). SHEP Cooperative Research Group. JAMA 1991;265: 3255e3264.

    5. Lithell H, Hansson L, Skoog I, et al. The Study on Cognition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE): Principal results of a randomized double-blind intervention trial. J Hypertens 2003;21:875e886.

    6. Gordon AL. Does Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) have a Role in UK Care Homes? Nottingham, UK: School of Community Health Sciences, University of Nottingham. 2012. Available at http://etheses.nottingham.ac.uk/2619/.

    7. Fahey T, Montgomery AA, Barnes J, Protheroe J. Quality of care for elderly residents in nursing homes and elderly people living at home: Controlled observational study. BMJ 2003;326:580.

    8. Ribbe MW, Ljunggren G, Steel K, et al. Nursing homes in 10 nations: A comparison between countries and settings. Age Ageing 1997;26:3e12.

    9. United Kingdom, Department of Health. Care Standards Act, xChapter 14 (2000). London: Stationery Office, 2001.

    10. Viswanathan MAM, Berkman ND, Chang S, et al. Assessing the risk of bias of individual studies in systematic reviews of health care interventions. In: Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews. Rockville, MD: AHRQ, 2012. Available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/ NBK47095/.

  • Metrics
    No metrics available
Share - Bookmark